I'd give mine if it helped bring a murderer to court....

Not right! Definitely not right!

I'll be surprised if the nail someone if it's the Jo case.

So they announce they are going to DNA test every man in Bristol. That'll work if the killer was female then. If the killer's male he'll think, hmm... right I'll get the hell out of Bristol then. Sorted. Ridiculous idea that would only happen if the police wanted to look they were actually doing something to catch the killer but would actually achieve nothing at all.

If your innocent surely it wouldn't bother anyone, do they not destroy the samples if you're proven innocent? At least they used to, I don't agree if they keep them on file.

If you were under suspicion of murder I think I would readily give mine to prove my innocence,it would be impossible to get every man in Bristols DNA it could be someone who does not live in Bristol.

Stonks, I would too if it was freely given, but I don't agree with a sweep of Bristol (and as Prom says, he'll have scarpered). What if it was a woman? The Police thought they had an easy case with the innocent Landlord and now they are panicking and infringe on people's human rights.

That landlord should be charged with possession of a dangerous hairdo.

Stupid idea. How do they know every single male in Bristol or who was in Bristol that day? If everyone's DNA was on a database as a compulsory order for living in the UK then crimes like this might not happen. That may be a stupid idea too, but would make people think twice. (Or 3 times. Or ensure they do not leave any DNA at the scene of the crime of course)

The males in Bristol should be asked to give their DNA,not told.
I doubt the killer would if asked,and scarper if its mandatory,if indeed he resides in the area. .

Erin, there's no way he's still there after this announcement, if it is a he.

Completely agree.

QUOTE KARMA:

Stupid idea. How do they know every single male in Bristol or who was in Bristol that day? If everyone's DNA was on a database as a compulsory order for living in the UK then crimes like this might not happen. That may be a stupid idea too, but would make people think twice. (Or 3 times. Or ensure they do not leave any DNA at the scene of the crime of course)

Good post Karma.  I found this question hard to answer, although I was leaning towards thinking maybe it would be a good idea, but of course, as you said, theres no guarantee that the person who did it even lives in that area.  Its a tricky one I think.  Some think that compulsory DNA testing is a violation of one's human rights, but so is being murdered.    And if taking everyone's DNA and keeping it on a database would curb crime and murder, would that be a bad thing?

I personally don't think it'd be a bad thing. It'd only be bad if you were in the mindset of committing crimes so severe that testing one's DNA would bring a guilty verdict. And the only crimes I can think of that would require such testing would be murder and rape. (Of course there are sometimes mitigating circumstances within rape where the victim might be crying wolf but I'm talking about cases that can be cast iron proven beyond any reasonable doubt). Ah bugger I know what I'm trying to say but don't know if it's coming out right!

I know what you're trying to say hun.    And I do understand where you're coming from, and youre making sense don't worry.  It could be tricky when it comes to rape, as the man would have his DNA on the woman, but she 'could' have consented and it may not have been rape...Like we said its a tricky one isnt it?

I'm not sure that having everybody on a database is a good thing. The number of mistakes that can occur are legion, people will sue, people will be incarcerated despite being innocent. It's a complete nightmare. Can you imagine trying to manage a database with at least 50 million people on it. It's a farce.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8037042.stm

Some good points there Cologne.  When you think of all the cock ups from the past like briefcases being left on trains with discs with 1000s of names and addresses and NI numbers on and so on....

Well quite, sparkles. It's very scary to let the state take over. I thought we'd seen the back of it after the election (despite being a socalist), but it appears that we have not.

I have sometimes thought (like Karma said) that a national DNA database would be a good idea, and in theory it would, but as you say Cologne, the actual logistics of it would be phenomenal, and a bit risky with the clumsiness and carelessness from the past with people losing info here there and everywhere

From the link Brisket posted 

I don't intend to commit any crimes.

QUOTE PROMETHESUS:
if everyone's DNA is on file they have an instant match straight away.

That is one of the things that would be good about having it.  Like karma said earlier, it may well deter people from committing crimes if they knew their DNA was on a database.  Its just the logistics of it and trying to keep it all under control that would be a nightmare.

Sometimes, just breathing can be construed as a crime against humanity. (Not in your case though, dear. You're cool in a Hendrix loving way)

Yep. And that's the problem.

If the police want to test the DNA of every man in Bristol, they must already have a sample of DNA for comparison.  The DNA sample would tell if it came from a man or woman.

The Bristol area has over 1 million people.  There is no way that they would be able to conduct DNA tests on even 1/4 of that people.  I magaine this announcement is a ruse to flush out a suspect.

Even if the person has scarpered, if they have the DNA samples of his family members (should they reside in Bristol) they can make a familial match and from there it doesn't take long get your suspect 

So let's infringe the human rights of every innocent person in the area under the assumption that it will catch this killer.
Just don't agree. I don't intend to commit a crime and yet I would refuse to have my DNA stored by the State. Why? Well it would be the State storing it not the present day Govt, there is no telling who would have access to it in the future and what technology could do in the future. It's entirely possible that scientists could replicate DNA to frame innocent people at the behest of the State

I'm with you Veggie 

Continuing from what Veggie said but yet at a slight tangent.........
Part of our daily cycle ride takes place over a rather isolated farm track. In and amongst the Blue Peter (an empty plastic drinks bottle, some foil, and make sure a grown up knows that you are using a sharp implement) crack pipes, and gentlemen's art magazines, one can be sure to find  discarded condoms, lying in the road and draped across the hedges. Assuming that they contain sources of DNA on the inside and outside, just think of the pranks and japes one could engineer.
I should imagine.

The trouble with the DNA testing is that on her last night she could have come in to contact with a lot of people. In the pub, in the shop, on the street. Brushing past people can transfer DNA. So imagine you give your sample and become a suspect. It's probably far-fetched but far-fetched can get you banged up for life.

I thought DNA could already be manufactured so anyone could be fitted up should the state have a sample and want to.

I assume they have found DNA in her flat, as her body didnt give much information as it had been frozen for days. The Police, i suspect know more than they are saying. I would have no problem giving my DNA

I think that everyone DNA should be kept on record, if you live by the law then it shouldn't bother. I son't see how people feel their human rights may be infringed by their DNA sitting in a lab somewhere never to be used unless they commit a crime. you.

Its not there first time this has been done, it goes on alot you just don't hear about it like this case because this is a high profile case..

The police haven't even suggested this yet, have they?

I heard that they were taking DNA from her Facebook friends, at the moment.

Although, as stonks said, this has been done before and it's usually voluntary, from what I recall. There was a case in Bristol, and one of the suspects scarpered to Australia, rather than give his DNA. They followed him there, tested him, and found a match.

DNA matching is not as straightforward as many people seem to think.
It is not 100% accurate, and mistakes can be made.
I have read a number of articles which go into the pros and cons - and there are cons.
I, for one, would not like to feel I was owned by the state.
I don't want an ID card, and I don't want my DNA saved.
I still like the idea of innocent until proved guilty as the best way.
My liberties are vital to me.

 

it has been done before, quite recent but i can't remember the details,  i would agree to a national database - remember stefan kitchco (sp) ?

isn't that why DNA evidence alone is not enough for a conviction?

sounds like they are testing close circles and seems natural to widen them further if they have no joy?  am pretty sure the cost of testing every male is prohibitive and therefore not the first port of call..

as for having my DNA on record.. I really wouldn't care to be honest.. am pretty sure in this day and age they have loads of info about us available to them anyway and a few skins cells added to it isn't going to make any difference..   lets face it if they want to fit you up for something they will find a way, DNA on record or not..